Prev: ALWAYS REPRIEVING RELATIVITY
Next: The moving system is not an inertial frame in 1905 Relativity
From: BURT on 30 Jun 2010 14:10
QM is too wavy. There is only a single sin wavelength for the wave
function. Even Stephen Hawking pointed this out in his book.

Mitch Raemsch
From: purple on 30 Jun 2010 14:24
On 6/30/2010 1:10 PM, BURT wrote:
> QM is too wavy. There is only a single sin wavelength for the wave
> function. Even Stephen Hawking pointed this out in his book.
>
> Mitch Raemsch

Are you talking about a wave or a wave function? Let's
see how much trouble you can get yourself into this time.
From: BURT on 30 Jun 2010 14:27
On Jun 30, 11:24 am, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote:
> On 6/30/2010 1:10 PM, BURT wrote:
>
> > QM is too wavy. There is only a single sin wavelength for the wave
> > function. Even Stephen Hawking pointed this out in his book.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> Are you talking about a wave or a wave function? Let's
> see how much trouble you can get yourself into this time.

Really the is not wave function in nature but QM people want to make
it a math. It is just a quantum wave.

Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 30 Jun 2010 15:10
On Jun 30, 11:27 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 30, 11:24 am, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote:
>
> > On 6/30/2010 1:10 PM, BURT wrote:
>
> > > QM is too wavy. There is only a single sin wavelength for the wave
> > > function. Even Stephen Hawking pointed this out in his book.
>
> > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > Are you talking about a wave or a wave function? Let's
> > see how much trouble you can get yourself into this time.
>
> Really the is not wave function in nature but QM people want to make
> it a math. It is just a quantum wave.
>
> Mitch Raemsch

The quantum wave in theory is mathematical but in nature it is
immaterial aether wave.

Mitch Raemsch
From: Raymond Yohros on 1 Jul 2010 10:29
On Jun 30, 2:10 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 30, 11:27 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 30, 11:24 am, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 6/30/2010 1:10 PM, BURT wrote:
>
> > > > QM is too wavy. There is only a single sin wavelength for the wave
> > > > function. Even Stephen Hawking pointed this out in his book.
>
> > > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > > Are you talking about a wave or a wave function? Let's
> > > see how much trouble you can get yourself into this time.
>
> > Really the is not wave function in nature but QM people want to make
> > it a math. It is just a quantum wave.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> The quantum wave in theory is mathematical but in nature it is
> immaterial aether wave.
>
> Mitch Raemsch
>

burt, do yourself a favor and stop wasting youre
life away with nonsense.
it is not how much you say but what you say!

r.y
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: ALWAYS REPRIEVING RELATIVITY
Next: The moving system is not an inertial frame in 1905 Relativity